ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Washington DC and The Holy Land (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   Obama Sebelius Tries To Blame GOP For Coming ObamaCare Failures (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=272019)

petegz28 04-11-2013 08:35 PM

Sebelius Tries To Blame GOP For Coming ObamaCare Failures
 
Health Care: As Democrats grow increasingly worried that ObamaCare will explode on the launch pad just as midterm elections get going, the Obama administration seeks to pin blame on Republicans. Good luck with that.

Earlier this week, Health and Human Services head Kathleen Sebelius admitted that she didn't realize how complicated getting ObamaCare off the ground would be.

Sebelius complained that "no one fully anticipated" the difficulties involved in implementing ObamaCare, or how confusing it would be with the public.

She wasn't talking about the massive and impossible task of imposing central planning on one-sixth of the nation's economy.

Instead, she was trying to find a way to blame Republicans for ObamaCare's failures when the inevitable problems start emerging.

Rather than say "let's get on board, let's make this work," recalcitrant Republicans have forced her to engage in "state-by-state political battles," Sebelius said at a Harvard School of Public Health forum. "The politics has been relentless."

So let's see if we get this. Democrats shoved an unpopular, expensive, ill-conceived and poorly written law down the country's throat with no Republican support, and without bothering to see whether states would want to take on the thankless and costly task of helping the feds implement it.

And now that many of these states are rebelling, it's the Republicans' fault?

Sebelius' fellow Democrat, West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, had a more accurate take on the problem the administration faces: the law is "probably the most complicated piece of legislation ever passed by the United States Congress" and "if it isn't done right the first time, it will just simply get worse."

Rockefeller, like a growing number of Democrats, realizes that ObamaCare is shaping up to be a political disaster for the party next November.

The influential Cook Political Report noted earlier this month that almost all of the Democratic insiders they talked to "voiced concern about the potential for the issue to hurt Democrats in 2014."

And just what could explain these concerns?

Maybe it's because even Sebelius now admits that ObamaCare will force insurance claims up 32%.

Or possibly it's because, despite endless assurances that the insurance exchanges would be ready on time, the administration had to delay for a year a key feature meant to give small business a choice of health plans.

Or because neither Sebelius nor the states have provided evidence they can get the rest of the exchanges ready by Oct. 1, when ObamaCare's open enrollment begins.

Or perhaps Democrats' fears stem from state insurance commissioners warning of a rate shock once ObamaCare's "community rating" rules and benefit mandates start. Or from rising evidence the law is hurting job growth as small businesses try to avoid its costs.

None of this, mind you, has anything to do with Republicans. And if the GOP were smart, it'd be focused on making sure that, come next November, the public knows that, too.


Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editor...#ixzz2QDFgsvjD
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

petegz28 04-11-2013 08:37 PM

Wow, not 1 Repub voted for the bill that Nancy Pelosi told us would have to pass before we would know what is in it and now it's the fault of the Repubs that the Dems just pretty much screwed the pooch?????


LMAO

Comrade Crapski 04-11-2013 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by petegz28 (Post 9579314)
Wow, not 1 Repub voted for the bill that Nancy Pelosi told us would have to pass before we would know what is in it and now it's the fault of the Repubs that the Dems just pretty much screwed the pooch?????


LMAO

That is how the media will report it, so, yeah.

stonedstooge 04-11-2013 08:45 PM

Wait until they throw 11 million more people into it

LiveSteam 04-11-2013 08:49 PM

I will do my part. & abuse the shit out of it.

WoodDraw 04-11-2013 08:56 PM

First, can I make a request that when you paste an article, put the link at the top.


And the issue here is that the supreme court threw out the mandate for states to join in. So there is a big mix of opt outs and states doing their own thing within the law. The law that passed changed - I'm not sure that's a huge issue.

petegz28 04-11-2013 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WoodDraw (Post 9579361)
First, can I make a request that when you paste an article, put the link at the top.


And the issue here is that the supreme court threw out the mandate for states to join in. So there is a big mix of opt outs and states doing their own thing within the law. The law that passed changed - I'm not sure that's a huge issue.

Sorry, could you put a little more bitch in your post? :evil:

RINGLEADER 04-11-2013 09:06 PM

It was designed to fail. How else can you explain having penalties that are dramatically less than providing the healthcare as 90% have received it in the past? And when it fails they will claim that the only solution is to expand the law that has caused the problems to begin with.

I informed my employees that once implemented I will be eliminating health care entirely. There was a lot of push back until I explained on a white board how I can pay X to keep the current coverage or a percentage of X and they can be in Obamacare. No one likes it, but they do understand why I'm doing it.

And yes, I know full well I'm contributing to the end of a system that worked adequately (and, dare I say, better than the new alternative about to arrive) for 90% of Americans for decades.

WoodDraw 04-11-2013 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by petegz28 (Post 9579372)
Sorry, could you put a little more bitch in your post? :evil:

I'm not bitching; just pointing out a fact. I know that doesn't fit in well with this forum's immediate agenda of "Holy shit some guy in BFE was racist" or "OMG blah blah blah".

It was just a comment - the reason this is harder is because the bill that passed is different than the bill they have to implement. I guess that makes less of a fun conversation though? :/

Comrade Crapski 04-11-2013 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WoodDraw (Post 9579419)

It was just a comment - the reason this is harder is because the bill that passed is different than the bill they have to implement.

Can you give us a specific change, and why it's harder to implement?

WoodDraw 04-11-2013 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Comrade Crapski (Post 9579424)
Can you give us a specific change, and why it's harder to implement?

The supreme court ruled that states have the right to opt out. If every state had to implement it, we'd have a different scenario. The Obama administration also thought, incorrectly, that more states would opt to set up their own exchanges.

Comrade Crapski 04-11-2013 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WoodDraw (Post 9579449)
The supreme court ruled that states have the right to opt out. If every state had to implement it, we'd have a different scenario. The Obama administration also thought, incorrectly, that more states would opt to set up their own exchanges.

Which states opted out? And why does it adversely affect the program as a whole, or the states that didn't opt out?

WoodDraw 04-11-2013 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Comrade Crapski (Post 9579467)
Which states opted out? And why does it adversely affect the program as a whole, or the states that didn't opt out?

The law was created with the idea that every state would have to support people up to the 1xx% level. I can't remember the exact percentage. The SC threw that out.

If you have the idea that every state has to comply, you'd think most republican states would want to go their own way. Basically the opposite has happened. So the national gov has had to play a much bigger role than they expected to.


I'm tired, so I won't reply here more tonight. Tomorrow I'll pull up that stats, if no one else does. I'm not really arguing here; just pointing out why what happened has changed how things now move forward. You can agree and disagree with the law and still accept that. Anyway, I'll respond tomorrow :)

BucEyedPea 04-12-2013 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WoodDraw (Post 9579449)
The supreme court ruled that states have the right to opt out. If every state had to implement it, we'd have a different scenario. The Obama administration also thought, incorrectly, that more states would opt to set up their own exchanges.

But that's a BIG reason why it doesn't work. It's not a change though, that was part of the bill for it to be implemented like that.
So nothing's really changed.

HonestChieffan 04-12-2013 07:45 AM

So its akin to putting a right hand nut on a left hand bolt. Wont work, wont fit. Neither will OC


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:10 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.